Exploring radiographers’ attitudes to mandatory CPD in the United Kingdom and New Zealand
Henwood, Suzanne; Yielder, Jill; Flinton, D.
Citation:Henwood, S., Yielder, J., & Flinton, D. (2010). Exploring radiographers’ attitudes to mandatory CPD in the United Kingdom and New Zealand. The Radiographer, 57(1), 25–32. Available from http://www.minnisjournals.com.au/radiographer/article/Exploring-radiographers-155
Permanent link to Research Bank record:https://hdl.handle.net/10652/1808
Introduction: This paper reports the first phase of a two-phase longitudinal study which explored the attitudes of radiographers in two countries (UK and New Zealand) towards CPD, before and after the introduction of a mandatory CPD policy. In addition, this paper outlines in brief the planned phase two of the project, which will be undertaken to assess whether attitudes change over time, following the introduced mandate. Methods: 1739 radiographers across both countries were approached via a survey using a written questionnaire with quantitative and qualitative components endorsed by the relevant professional body in each country (Society of Radiographers and the New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technologists). The questionnaire was statistically analysed using t-tests. In addition, the qualitative components were analysed thematically, to add depth and explanations to the findings. This paper presents the results, focusing especially on the qualitative data in order to fully explore the attitudes demonstrated. Results: The results of the study showed that a degree of apathy surrounded CPD participation, despite the professional expectation that staff be CPD active. On an individual level, radiographers self reported a low level, or a complete lack of formal recording of CPD. A number of barriers were identified, which were perceived by participants to restrict their CPD activity, including, of particular note, poor staffing levels and lack of employer support. Radiographers in both countries appeared to have a narrow understanding of what is perceived to constitute CPD, with an apparent focus on formal, attendance-based activities. Less formal, on-the-job activities were not always considered as CPD by participants in this study. Conclusion: This study outlined a range of factors which impact on attitudes towards CPD, with many similarities in findings across both countries represented. A lack of intrinsic motivation was demonstrated, which is perceived to hamper active participation in CPD. There was a desire for personal benefit from CPD participation to be evident, in order to motivate individuals to get actively involved. The complexity of the current working environment was outlined, with acknowledgement that the mandatory policy towards CPD is not the only factor affecting participation. While further research will be required to examine the impact of all the variables affecting CPD, the results of this study may allow individuals and managers to begin to interact with CPD participation in order to attempt to increase the level and effectiveness of learning in practice.